[Standards-JIG] Re: JEP-0054 vcard email definition is inconsistent

Peter Saint-Andre stpeter at jabber.org
Thu Sep 16 17:37:23 UTC 2004

In article <20040916110658.GC11899 at serwis2.beta>,
 Jacek Konieczny <jajcus at bnet.pl> wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 16, 2004 at 04:30:43PM +1000, trejkaz at xaoza.net wrote:
> > I'm paranoid about implementing RDF in general.  Allowing so much 
> > flexibility
> > is good in theory, but think of the poor people who have to write GUIs to
> > display and edit this information, particularly when one fact could be 
> > written
> > a dozen different ways in full RDF.  They can't even agree on whether
> > rdf:about or rdf:resource is the proper attribute when listing information
> > about another resource. :-/
> So out JEPs should define some kind of guidelines or profiles for RDF
> usage. So the basic data (e.g. everything from current vcard-temp)
> should be written in a specific way, but the protocol would be still
> extensible.

Perhaps it would be appropriate to translate the backend RDF into x:data 
for client presentation in editable forms? That way, clients don't have 
to implement another super-flexible data protocol.


More information about the Standards mailing list